[deleted]
Does the Amazon provide 20% of our oxygen?
51–60 of 227 posts
Re: Does the Amazon provide 20% of our oxygen?
#52The basic gist of the article is found about 1/2 way in: "First, the phytoplankton in the oceans also photosynthesise [...] Therefore in terms of TOTAL global photosynthesis, photosynthesis in the Amazon contributes around 9%. [...] Second, a bigger point that is often missed is that the Amazon consumes about as much oxygen as it produces." This reminds me, as we should all be reminded on a regular basis, the bulk of…
Netflix has a pretty cool series called "One Strange Rock". You should watch it, they explain the Amazon's role well in one episode. First of all oxygen is constant. Oxygen is currently not the problem. And it's a good thing that it's constant because we don't want more of it either. The problem with Amazon is that on Earth it's all interconnected and while there's plenty of room for failure, there is a tipping point…
So you see it being like the singularity that people predicted in tech/AI but for natural disasters?
Re: Does the Amazon provide 20% of our oxygen?
#53The basic gist of the article is found about 1/2 way in: "First, the phytoplankton in the oceans also photosynthesise [...] Therefore in terms of TOTAL global photosynthesis, photosynthesis in the Amazon contributes around 9%. [...] Second, a bigger point that is often missed is that the Amazon consumes about as much oxygen as it produces." This reminds me, as we should all be reminded on a regular basis, the bulk of…
I don't quite get the claim behind the Gell-Mann effect. It assumes that because journalism about physics is inaccurate and oversimplified, journalism about everything else is too. But why should this be? Physics, and similar hard sciences, are deep and complex fields. There's plenty of math, jargon, and a long literature. Of course inaccurate simplifications happen when writing about it for a popular audience. Add i…
> It assumes that because journalism about physics is inaccurate and oversimplified
No, it's about entertainment and then other fields for other people since Michael Crichton named it. He specifically says minimum entertainment for himself as the creator.
He named it after Gell-Mann as a kinda in joke.
Re: Does the Amazon provide 20% of our oxygen?
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
I googled some and it looks like Amazon rainforest alone removes about a quarter of fossil fuel CO2 from the atmosphere. That's more than I thought it'd be. And it looks like it could sequester much more if there was more phosphorus in the soil.
Where did you see that figure?
https://newscenter.lbl.gov/2019/08/20/amazon-rainforest-abso...
Quote: "The Amazon Basin is critical to help mitigate climate change due to its trees absorbing around a quarter of the CO2 released each year from the burning of fossil fuels."
Re: Does the Amazon provide 20% of our oxygen?
#55More importantly as the planet's "lungs" the Amazon filters a great quantity of carbon dioxide from the air.
I googled some and it looks like Amazon rainforest alone removes about a quarter of fossil fuel CO2 from the atmosphere. That's more than I thought it'd be. And it looks like it could sequester much more if there was more phosphorus in the soil.
Where do they put it? Wouldn't this require the total biomass of the rainforest to be continually increasing?
Re: Does the Amazon provide 20% of our oxygen?
#56I haven't been following this specific news story, but I remember from my environmental sociology class that fire prevention in forests eventually leads to unnatural states that are then prone to massive uncontainable fires. Have they been suppressing natural fire in this region for too long? If this fire is naturally burning, then isn't the best response to let it run its course unless human lives are threatened?
> Have they been suppressing natural fire in this region for too long?
This is confusing for many people, I know.
Ecosystems tend to increase its complexity with time. From lava field to savanna to forests. This is how it works. Life fills the gaps.
If untouched, forests aim for the higher state of organisation possible, the so called "climax": A big forest, with huge old trees. Plants accumulate water, big plants accumulate big water, plants make water also (Is a by-product of this respiration)...
...therefore the climax is a humid forest of some kind (a rainforest, a bamboo cloudforest, a laurisilva, a scottish caledonian rainforest, a sequoia forest)
A place full of spongy fungus and plants accumulating water, a place that creates its own climate and make rains that collect in streams and then in rivers for the people benefit. They do not need fire to work at all. Wildfires are scarce and self-contained events. Such places would need a lot of energy to start burning.
The young forest is vulnerable to fire. For decades the fire risk increases. This is that people remember, but sadly they do not see the second part. After a thousand years, the risk start decreasing and then the entire area is fire-proof. Wildfires stop often when reaching an old forest.
The tragedy is that before to reach this state of full healing, the forest is burned again BY MAN (>90% of wildfires are caused by man). Is called "necessary management" or "reducing the risk", but life does not need human management. Has evolved to sustain maximum amount of life possible. We need "Management" is another way to say we want "nature explotation". Is the "groundhog day" film with trees.
Nobody is trying to restore it and return the water to Mediterranean or to California because... it would need two or three human generations to show results and it would need much smarter humans.
Re: Does the Amazon provide 20% of our oxygen?
#57No, it doesn't provide.
But the article totally misses the issue of carbon capture.
Re: Does the Amazon provide 20% of our oxygen?
#5820% of sequestered carbon dioxide is in the Amazon. If it burns to the ground then that CO2 will be released. It doesn’t affect oxygen levels.
Re: Does the Amazon provide 20% of our oxygen?
#59The basic gist of the article is found about 1/2 way in: "First, the phytoplankton in the oceans also photosynthesise [...] Therefore in terms of TOTAL global photosynthesis, photosynthesis in the Amazon contributes around 9%. [...] Second, a bigger point that is often missed is that the Amazon consumes about as much oxygen as it produces." This reminds me, as we should all be reminded on a regular basis, the bulk of…
I don't quite get the claim behind the Gell-Mann effect. It assumes that because journalism about physics is inaccurate and oversimplified, journalism about everything else is too. But why should this be? Physics, and similar hard sciences, are deep and complex fields. There's plenty of math, jargon, and a long literature. Of course inaccurate simplifications happen when writing about it for a popular audience. Add i…
If someone asked me what i thought the main problem with comments on Hacker News was, i would direct them to this comment.
Re: Does the Amazon provide 20% of our oxygen?
#60Wrong Amazon, you again!